[Dovecot] dsync redesign

[Jeff Gustafson]

On Sat, 2012-03-24 at 08:19 +0100, Attila Nagy wrote:

> 
> I personally think that Dovecot could gain much more if the amount of 
> work going into fixing or improving dsync would go into making Dovecot 
> to (be able of) use a high scale, distributed storage backend.
> I know it's much harder, because there are several major differences 
> compared to the "low latency" and consistency problem free local file 
> systems, but its fruits are also sweeter for the long term. :)

	Do you have any suggestions for a distributed replicated filesystem
that works well with dovecot? I've looked into glusterfs, but the
latency is way too high for lots of small files. They claim this problem
is fixed in glusterfs 3.3. NFS too slow for my installation so I don't
see how any of the distributed filesystems would help me. I've also
tried out ZFS, but it appears to have issues with metadata look ups with
directories that have tens or hundreds of thousands of files in them.
For me, the best filesystem is straight up ext4 running on locally
attached storage. 
	I think a solid, fast dsync implementation would be very useful for a
large installation. 

		...Jeff